‘No way to invest in a career here': US academics flee overseas to avoid Trump crackdown
default
Eric Schuster was over the moon when he landed a lab assistant position in a coral reef biology lab at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography (SIO). The 23-year-old had recently graduated with a bachelor's degree in nanoengineering from the University of California, San Diego, into a fiercely competitive job market. He felt like he'd struck gold.
But the relentless cuts to scientific research and attacks on higher education by the Trump administration have turned what felt like a promising academic future into unstable ground.
'There are several labs, both at our institution and around the US, that have essentially just sent everyone home because they have no money,' Schuster said, expressing concern not just for oceanography but for all fields of scientific research. The multi-pronged attacks have 'been seriously detrimental to just about everyone', he said.
Though Schuster is grateful for his position, he is in a constant state of worry about whether it will still exist tomorrow. UCSD, which SIO is a part of, told the Guardian that the Trump administration has ended or frozen roughly $90m in grants from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Nearly 200 other grants are facing delays. SIO researchers have noted that the 'vast majority' of their funding comes from the government.
Schuster has decided he's not going to stick around to see if he will lose his job.
He'll be starting his graduate studies this fall in France with a European University Networks (EUN) program, a transnational alliance of higher education institutions. He plans to stay outside of the US after to continue his career.
'It's a grab bag that anyone you're talking to has had decreased funding, or lost almost all of their funding, or is having trouble continuing their funding,' he says.
'That, along with the pretty pervasive and growing anti-science establishment narrative … have been strong motivators to look elsewhere,' Schuster said.
Schuster is one of many budding academics reflecting what could become a significant American brain drain, sending the brightest minds in the country to flee the US and take their scholarly endeavors elsewhere. Historically, the US has attracted top talent from around the world, but the moves by the Trump administration may have reversed these conditions in record time.
Research institutions are feeling the strain from funding cuts from some of the biggest grant-making bodies in the world. The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds about 25% of federally backed basic research at US universities, but Trump's proposed budget would cut over $5bn, or 57%, from its budget, chopping it from roughly $9bn down to $3.9bn. The US National Institutes of Health would lose about 40% of its budget compared to last year.
Related: US universities are moving to the right. Will it help them escape Trump's wrath?
But those cuts aren't the only cause for anxiety. Nerves throughout the scholarly community are also on edge given what is widely perceived as a historic attack on academic freedom through administration assaults against universities such Columbia and Harvard University under the guise of rooting out antisemitism and diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Dozens more universities are waiting for their turn.
A recent Nature survey revealed that approximately 75% of US-based scientists are contemplating relocation, with early-career researchers and PhD students particularly inclined toward opportunities in Canada, Europe and Australia.
Valerio Francioni is one of them. A 32-year-old Italian citizen who moved to the US after getting his PhD at the University of Edinburgh, Francioni is now a postdoctoral research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology studying neuroscience.
International students have faced nonstop chaos in the past few months, from visa suspensions to the attempted deportations of several students who expressed support for Palestinians. Last month, the Trump administration ordered US embassies worldwide to immediately stop scheduling visa interviews for foreign students as it prepares to implement comprehensive 'social media screenings' for all international applicants.
'As an international, there's just no way that you can invest safely into a career here right now, there's just no way to plan ahead. The situation is just too volatile to feel that you're making a safe investment by being here,' Francioni said.
A recent report from the Economist suggests that international students (and some domestic) are losing interest in American PhD programs. Searches for US PhD programs on the website FindAPhD fell 40% year on year in April, while interest from students in Europe has fallen by 50%. Data from another website, Studyportals, shows a decrease in interest for domestic PhDs among Americans, and a rise in interest for international programs compared to the previous year.
I don't want to live in a country that does not abide by the laws that they have set in stone ... It has deeply troubled me
Carter Freshour, Thunderbird School of Global Management
Though his own visa has not been affected yet, Francioni plans to leave the US once his run at MIT is finished. He had wanted to stay in Boston – it's a great place for people in the neurotech field, he says, and his American partner is there. But his calculus has changed in the past few months.
Kristina, originally from Sweden, is grappling with the same questions. A mathematics professor at a university in the north-east US, Kristina requested that only her first name be used and her institution not be named over concerns of retaliation by the Trump administration.
'Right now, I think that everyone who's not a citizen feels that we cannot express our opinions,' Kristina said.
She's been in the US for 25 years, but does not have US citizenship. She is now debating whether to stay or leave. To her, the question is a moral one, whether to leave for safety or stay to 'fight for a more democratic future'.
Emmanuel Guerisoli, a French and Italian academic with a PhD in sociology and history, moved to the US in 2010 to pursue a masters in sociology. He is now finishing a postdoc at the Zolberg Institute on Migration and Mobility at the New School.
Guerisoli is concerned about being targeted by Ice because of discussions he has led in class on the war in Gaza. He was offered a tenure-track position at a different institution, he said, but it was quickly rescinded, which he was told was due to the Trump administration's funding cuts.
He gave up on applying to academic jobs in the US and decided to move to Argentina this summer, where the dread of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents knocking down his door will not follow him every day.
'It's not just that you're being questioned on your political beliefs, but any type of critical or academic engagement on certain topics that go beyond the realm of just politics are being targeted,' he said.
'Even if the state department renews my visa, I would be concerned about teaching courses the way I have done it in the past,' he said.
Scholars at Risk, which assists academics facing political pressure, saw this coming.
'The recent policies have created a tremendous amount of anxiety,' Robert Quinn, the group's executive director, said. He worries the loss will have ripple effects far beyond campus.
'When a big economic contributor gets disrupted, that's going to begin to affect everybody relatively quickly in those communities,' Quinn said. 'Beyond that is the effect on public health. If we look at the cutting of the research pipeline, that means fundamentally cutting off access to services and medicines and treatments that affect every American who happens to get sick.'
Related: Why Trump is really going after Harvard
Quinn says that Scholars at Risk is working on ways to support US academics exploring foreign opportunities.
Several other countries are jumping in to fill the void, and have already begun courting American academics.
The European Union has pledged €500m (around $556m) over the next two years to become a prime destination for displaced scientists. France's president, Emmanuel Macron, announced $113m for a national program to bring in American researchers, and Aix-Marseille University separately announced Safe Place for Science, a three-year, $16.8m program to attract 15 American scientists working in climate, health and astrophysics.
A university spokesperson previously told the Guardian that more than 60 applications have been received, 30 of them coming within the first 24 hours.
Meanwhile, Denmark is fast-tracking 200 positions for American researchers. In a widely shared Instagram post, the head of the Danish chamber of commerce directly invited American scientists to consider Denmark, 'a place where facts still matter'.
Related: 'Insidious fear' fills universities as Trump escalates conflict during commencement season
Sweden's education minister held a roundtable of university leaders to strategize on attracting frustrated US talent, and publicly called for American scientists to relocate.
Canadian institutions are following a similar path. The University Health Network in Toronto and associated foundations are investing CA$30m ($21.5m) to bring in 100 early-career scientists from the US and beyond. Meanwhile, the University of British Columbia reopened graduate applications in April specifically to accommodate interested US students.
Carter Freshour, a 22-year-old US citizen, had just begun his masters program in business at the Thunderbird School of Global Management in Arizona when Trump took office.
As soon as the attacks on higher education began, he dropped out of the program out of fear of the direction the country is heading. He is now in the process of moving to Madrid, where he will finish his business degree, and then plans to move to Portugal.
'I don't want to live in a country that does not abide by the laws that they have set in stone,' Freshour said. 'It has deeply troubled me, the direction that the United States is going.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
30 minutes ago
- CNN
Republican plans to overhaul Medicaid are already shaking up the 2026 midterms
Senate Republicans have yet to finalize their version of President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy proposal, but GOP lawmakers up for reelection in 2026 are bracing for the political impact of the bill's Medicaid cuts. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine is pushing for a provider relief fund. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina has warned GOP leaders about how many in his state could lose care. And Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa has picked up a crop of Democratic challengers campaigning off her 'Well, we all are going to die' response to a town hall protester. Tens of thousands of people could lose coverage in each of those three senators' states, according to a KFF analysis on the version of the bill passed by the Republican-led House last month. Beleaguered Democrats, meanwhile, hope that laser-focusing on health care will help them chip away at the Republicans' 53-seat Senate majority and take back the House. A key part of Democratic messaging has been to tie the Medicaid cuts, which would largely affect low-income Americans, to tax breaks for the wealthy. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the changes would reduce federal Medicaid spending by roughly $800 billion over 10 years, largely by instituting work requirements for certain adults eligible for Medicaid and postponing a Biden administration rule intended to simplify enrolling and renewing coverage. 'It is crazy politics for them to do this,' said Brad Woodhouse, a longtime Democratic operative and executive director of Protect Our Care, a health care advocacy group that launched a $10 million campaign this year to oppose Medicaid cuts. 'Everyone is going to be unhappy with this bill, unless you're a very high net worth individual: a millionaire, a multi-millionaire, a billionaire, or a large corporation.' Many Republicans have argued that the cuts to Medicaid are meant to sustain the program for those who need it most. They're also betting that the rest of the bill will be more popular. Paul Shumaker, a longtime North Carolina GOP strategist who advises Tillis and other Republican leaders in the state, said he was 'bullish' on the midterm elections because he believes voters will support Republican arguments about rooting waste, fraud and abuse out of Medicaid. He also thinks voters will back other policies in the legislative package like cutting taxes on tips and overtime pay and raising the child tax credit. 'Democrats are basically staking themselves out on issues that resonate with one-third of the voters, whereas Republicans have staked themselves out on issues that resonate with two-thirds of the voters,' Shumaker said. 'They have put themselves into a box.' Democrats are betting that a narrow focus on the bill's health care provisions will have the most impact, even in states like Iowa, where Democrats are hoping to oust Ernst, contest an open governor's seat and two US House seats. Ernst, who is seeking a third term next year, picked up a Democratic challenger earlier this month after she told a town hall protester 'well, we all are going to die' in response to comments about cuts to Medicaid. Ernst doubled down on the remarks in a video filmed in a cemetery. An Ernst spokesperson pointed to Ernst's full comments, in which she said she wants to leave Medicaid funding for the 'most vulnerable' and 'those that are eligible.' 'While Democrats fearmonger against strengthening the integrity of Medicaid, Senator Ernst is focused on protecting Medicaid for the most vulnerable,' reads a statement from the senator's office. 'She will continue to stand up for Iowa's rural hospitals, clinics, and community health centers that serve our state.' Iowa state Rep. J.D. Scholten announced his campaign soon after Ernst's town hall, becoming the second candidate in the race after Democrat Nathan Sage, who announced in April. Some election forecasters shifted the race slightly – from solid to likely Republican — after he launched his campaign. 'We're seeing people, just everyday people calling Ernst 'Joni Hearse,'' Scholten told CNN. 'You just get that sense, politically, that if we can tap into that … this is where our foot's in the door to a lot of voters who have not been voting Democrat.' It's also motivating Democratic voters in the state. Melinda Magdalene Wings, a 65-year-old retired hospice nurse from Iowa City, Iowa, told CNN she's worried cuts to Medicaid funding would impact the assisted living home where her 86-year-old parents, including her mother who has advanced dementia, reside. In February, she started writing her representatives about the bill. 'As Iowa's elected officials, I expect them to vote for what's best for Iowa — for the people of Iowa — and not for this administration,' she said. 'Money going to millionaires doesn't make any sense.' A handful of Senate Republicans, including Tillis and Collins, have raised concerns about the impact the reconciliation bill could have on their states, particularly a Senate proposal that would limit how much states can raise provider taxes, a key source of revenue. The provider tax provision is among a handful that Senate Republicans are revising after the chamber's parliamentarian ruled they didn't meet the strict budget rules that allow the legislation to pass with a simple 51-vote majority. 'I've been very concerned about the cuts in Medicaid and the impact on my state, but other states as well,' Collins told CNN's Manu Raju on Tuesday. 'I've also been concerned about the health of rural hospitals, nursing homes, health centers and have been working on a provider relief fund. But that doesn't offset the problem with the Medicaid cuts.' Tillis said Tuesday that while the bill's Medicaid cuts are 'directionally right,' Republicans 'have to do it at a pace that states can absorb, or we're gonna have bad outcomes, political and policy.' Tensions within the Senate GOP caucus have also spilled out into the open. Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell told colleagues with concerns about the bill during a private GOP conference meeting that 'failure is not an option' and people in their states raising concerns about the bill's Medicaid provisions would 'get over it,' according to a report from Punchbowl News. Democrats quickly latched onto the comments. 'I hope Republicans can 'get over it' when they lose their seats in the midterms,' DNC communications director Rosemary Boeglin said in a statement. A spokesperson for McConnell said the senator was referring to people who are 'abusing' Medicaid and 'should be working,' and the need to 'withstand Democrats' scare tactics' on the issue. 'Senator McConnell was urging his fellow members to highlight that message to our constituents and remind them that we should all be against waste, fraud, and abuse while working to protect our rural hospitals and have safety nets in place for people that need it,' the statement read. Nearly 8 million more people would be uninsured in 2034 because of the Medicaid provisions in a version of the bill passed by the House last month, according to an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. Most of those cuts come from the legislation's work requirement, which calls for able-bodied adults without dependent children to work or volunteer at least 80 hours a month. A proposal unveiled by the Senate this month would expand that requirement to adults with children over the age of 14, which would likely result in even more people losing coverage. Republicans have argued they are reforming Medicaid to sustain the program for people who need it the most. They've focused their messaging on work requirements, which are popular with voters, and policies that would penalize states for covering undocumented immigrants with their own funds. 'President Trump and Senate Republicans are working to protect Medicaid for Americans who truly need it,' Nick Puglia, a National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesperson, said in a statement to CNN. 'Voters will reject Democrats' lies, fearmongering, and attempts to use taxpayer benefits to subsidize illegal aliens and their open border policies.' Republicans are also framing a vote against the reconciliation bill, which extends the individual income tax cuts in the 2017 GOP tax policy overhaul that are set to expire at the end of the year, as a vote for tax increases. 'I think in the end, this bill will play out on the Republicans saying, 'We got it done. We passed it, the economy's good. We spared you from having to pay more taxes,'' David McIntosh, the president of Club for Growth, told reporters recently. 'And then pivot to say, 'but if my Democrat opponent gets elected, they want to undo it … vote for us so that we can stop them from raising your taxes.'' A Washington Post-Ipsos poll released June 17, before the Senate released its framework, found overwhelming support for some provisions in the bill. Seventy-two percent of Americans support raising the child tax credit, 71% support extending tax cuts for individuals making less than $100,000 and 65% support eliminating taxes on tips. But, as whole, 42% of Americans oppose the bill, while 23% support it and 34% said they had no opinion. A KFF poll released the same day found that 64% of adults had an unfavorable view of the House's version of the bill. The poll found that 68% of adults – including 51% of Democrats, 66% of independents and 88% of Republicans – support work requirements, but that support for work requirements dropped to 35% when adults heard the argument that 'most people on Medicaid are already working' or unable to work. Democrats have described the work requirements as an intentional bureaucratic hurdle. Health policy experts and Democratic campaigns have also focused on the ripple effects cuts to Medicaid funding could have on the system as a whole, including rural hospitals and nursing home care. 'A lot of Medicaid patients seek care from the same providers or same types of providers,' said Adrianna McIntyre, an assistant professor of health policy and politics at Harvard University. 'So when you're pulling dollars out of the system and away from those providers, it doesn't just hurt the patients who no longer have insurance through Medicaid.' CNN's Manu Raju, Alison Main and Fredreka Schouten contributed to this report.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Even as markets rally, Trump's policymaking causes market angst
By Suzanne McGee (Reuters) -As Wall Street puts April's tariff shakeout in the rearview mirror and indexes set record highs, investors remain wary of U.S. President Donald Trump's rapid-fire, sometimes chaotic policymaking process and see the rally as fragile. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq composite index advanced past their previous highs into uncharted territory on Friday. Yet traders and investors remain wary of what may lie ahead. Trump's April 2 reciprocal tariffs on major trading partners roiled global financial markets and put the S&P 500 on the threshold of a bear market designation when it ended down 19% from its February 19 record-high close. This week's leg up came after a U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Iran brought an end to a 12-day air battle that had sparked a jump in crude prices and raised worries of higher inflation. But a relief rally started after Trump responded to the initial tariff panic that gripped financial markets by backing away from his most draconian plans. JP Morgan Chase, in the midyear outlook published on Wednesday by its global research team, said the environment was characterized by "extreme policy uncertainty." "Nobody wants to end a week with a risk-on tilt to their portfolios," said Art Hogan, market strategist at B. Riley Wealth. "Everyone is aware that just as the market feels more certain and confident, a single wildcard policy announcement could change everything," even if it does not ignite a firestorm of the kind seen in April. Part of this wariness from institutional investors may be due to the magnitude of the 6% S&P 500 rally that followed Trump's re-election last November and culminated in the last new high posted by the index in February, said Joseph Quinlan, market strategist at Bank of America. "We were out ahead of our skis," Quinlan said. A focus on deregulation, tax cuts and corporate deals brought out the "animal spirits," he said. Then came the tariff battles. Quinlan remains upbeat on the outlook for U.S. stocks and optimistic that a new global trade system could lead to U.S. companies opening new markets and posting higher revenues and profits. But he said he is still cautious. "There will still be spikes of volatility around policy unknowns." Overall, measures of market volatility are now well below where they stood at the height of the tariff turmoil in April, with the CBOE VIX index now at 16.3, down from a 52.3 peak on April 8. UNSTABLE MARKETS "Our clients seem to have become somewhat desensitized to the headlines, but it's still an unhealthy market, with everyone aware that trading could happen based on the whims behind a bunch of" social media posts, said Jeff O'Connor, head of market structure, Americas, at Liquidnet, an institutional trading platform. Trading in the options market shows little sign of the kind of euphoria that characterized stock market rallies of the recent past. "On the institutional front, we do see a lot of hesitation in chasing the market rally," Stefano Pascale, head of U.S. equity derivatives research at Barclays, said. Unlike past episodes of sharp market selloffs, institutional investors have largely stayed away from employing bullish call options to chase the market higher, Pascale said, referring to plain options that confer the right to buy at a specified future price and date. Bid/ask spreads on many stocks are well above levels O'Connor witnessed in late 2024, while market depth - a measure of the size and number of potential orders - remains at the lowest levels he can recall in the last 20 years. "The best way to describe the markets in the last couple of months, even as they have recovered, is to say they are unstable," said Liz Ann Sonders, market strategist at Charles Schwab. She said she is concerned that the market may be reaching "another point of complacency" akin to that seen in March. "There's a possibility that we'll be primed for another downside move," Sonders addded. Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital in Washington, said he came up with the term "Snapchat presidency" to describe the whiplash effect on markets of the president's constantly changing policies on markets. "He feels more like a day trader than a long-term institutional investor," Spindel said, alluding to Trump's policy flip-flops. "One minute he's not going to negotiate, and the next he negotiates." To be sure, traders seem to view those rapid shifts in course as a positive in the current rally, signaling Trump's willingness to heed market signals. "For now, at least, stocks are willing to overlook the risks that go along with this style and lack of consistent policies, and give the administration a break as being 'market friendly'," said Steve Sosnick, market strategist at Interactive Brokers. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
35 minutes ago
- Forbes
Quantum, Moore's Law, And AI's Future
microchip integrated on motherboard In the game of AI acceleration, there are several key moving parts. One of them is hardware: what do the chips look like? And this is a very interesting question. Another is quantum computing: what role will it play? Another is scaling. Everyone from CEOs and investors to engineers is scrambling to figure out what the future looks like, but we got a few ideas from a recent panel at Imagination in Action that assembled some of the best minds on the matter. WSE and the Dinner Plate of Reasoning Not too long ago, I wrote about the Cerebras WSE chip, a mammoth piece of silicon about the size of a dinner plate, that is allowing the centralization of large language model efforts. This is an impressive piece of hardware by any standard, and has a role in coalescing the vanguard of what we are doing with AI hardware. In the aforementioned panel discussion, Julie Choi from Cerebras started by showing off the company's WSE superchip, noting that some call it the 'caviar of inference.' (I thought that was funny.) 'I think that as we evolve, we're just going to see even more innovative, novel approaches at the hardware architecture level,' she said. 'The optimization space is extremely large,' said Dinesh Maheshwari, discussing architecture and compute units. 'So I encourage everyone to look at it.' Panelist Caleb Sirak, also of MIT, talked about ownership of hardware. 'As the models themselves start to change, how can businesses themselves integrate them directly and get them for a fair price, but also convert that AI, and the energy involved, into a productive utility?' 'What is a computer, and what can a computer do?' asked Alexander Keesling, explaining his company's work on hardware. 'We took the fundamental unit of matter, a single atom, and turned it into the fundamental unit of information, which is a quantum bit … a quantum computer is the first time in human history where we can take advantage of the fundamental properties of nature to do something that is different and more powerful.' Jeremy Kepner of MIT's Lincoln Lab had some thoughts on the singularity of computing – not the race toward AGI, but a myopic centralization of an overarching 'operation.' 'Every single computer in the high end that we built for the last many decades has only done one operation,' he said. 'So there's a lot to unpack there, but it's for very deep mathematical and physics reasons: that's the only operation we've ever been able to figure out how to accelerate over many decades. And so what I often tell the users is, the computer picks the application. AI happens to be acceleratable by that operation.' He urged the audience to move forward in a particular way. 'Think about whatever you want to do, and if you can accelerate it with that kind of mathematical operation, you know the sky is the limit on what you can do,' he said. 'And someone in your field will figure it out, and they will move ahead dramatically.' Engineering Challenges and AI Opportunities The panel also mentioned some of the headwinds that innovators must contend with. On the other hand, Jeff Grover noted the near-term ability of systems to evolve. 'We're actually quite excited about this,' he said. The Software End Panelists discussed the relevance of software and the directions that coding is going in. 'Programming languages are built for people,' Sirak said. 'How do you actually change that to build languages and tools that AI can use?' Choi mentioned benchmarks like inference rates of 2900 tokens per second for Llama 4. 'Open source models are rich for developers,' she said. 'What that's doing is building a bridge between the bravest developers. I would say the early adopters tend to be very courageous, and they're willing to code on things that they've never seen before.' The Fast Car Several panelists talked about a particular metaphor to a Ferrari, with Choi referencing 'Ferrari-level' speeds for the Cerebras chip. Maheshwari talked about 'exotic' chips, and design from an architecture paradigm, comparing certain builds to 'picking up groceries in a Ferrari.' He also mentioned the imperative of keeping the technology 'street legal.' Moore's Law and Progress Kepner talked about being surprised by what computers can do, and the size of investment in the industry. Moore's law, he said, implied an upper limit for spending. He predicted another decade of efficiencies, and cited the Ozaki scheme, a matrix method for preserving precision in calculations. What About Quantum? 'I think that the first area where we're going to see quantum computing impact is going to be in research,' Keesling said. 'These problems, at their core, are (about) trying to answer what happens when atoms and electrons interact with one another and develop these emergent behaviors … how we think about chemistry, how we think about drug interactions, how we think about material properties, all comes from electrons and atoms moving.' There was a lot to unpack in this panel discussion, including details on how we're going to achieve progress in the next few years. The Ozaki Scheme Going back to this matrix idea, I was not familiar with this term, so I looked it up and asked ChatGPT to describe it in basic English. 'It's named after Makoto Ozaki, the person who came up with the idea,' the model told me. 'He found a smart way to do very accurate math (like multiplying big grids of numbers) using fast but less accurate tools (like low-precision numbers). His method splits the work into small, simple steps and then carefully puts the pieces back together to get the exact right answer.' Going further, ChatGPT, just to be nice, even gave me a medieval storyline to show how the Ozaki scheme works, and to contrast it to other alternatives. I'm just going to print that here, because it's interesting. The Tale of the Kingdom of Matrixland In the kingdom of Matrixland, the royal court has a big job: multiplying giant tables of numbers (called matrices). But the royal calculator is slow when it uses fancy, high-precision numbers. So the King holds a contest: 'Who can multiply big matrices both quickly and accurately?' Sir Ozaki's Clever Trick Sir Ozaki, a wise mathematician, enters the contest. He says: 'I'll break each matrix into small, easy pieces that the royal calculator can handle quickly. Then I'll multiply those simple parts and put them back together perfectly.' The crowd gasps! His method is fast and still gives the exact right answer. The King declares it the Ozaki Scheme. The Other Contestants But other knights have tricks too: Lady Refina (Iterative Refinement) She does the quick math first, then checks her work. If it's off, she fixes it — again and again — until it's just right. She's very accurate, but takes more time. Sir Compenso (Compensated Summation) He notices small errors that get dropped during math and catches them before they vanish. He's good at adding accurately, but can't handle full matrix multiplication like Ozaki. Lady Mixie (Mixed Precision) She charges in with super speed, using tiny fast numbers (like FP8 or FP16). Her answers aren't perfect, but they're 'good enough' for training the kingdom's magical beasts (AI models). Baron TensorFloat (TF32) He uses a special number format invented by the kingdom's engineers. Faster than full precision, but not as sharp as Ozaki. A favorite of the castle's GPU-powered wizard lab. The Ending Sir Ozaki's method is the most exact while still using fast tools. Others are faster or simpler, but not always perfect. The King declares: 'All of these knights are useful, depending on the task. But if you want both speed and the exact answer, follow Sir Ozaki's path!' Anyway, you have a range of ideas here about quantum computing, information precision, and acceleration in the years to come. Let me know what you think about what all of these experts have said about the future of AI.
